Modern Technology, Preventive Ethics, and the Human Condition:

FOUR GROUPS OF PHILOSOPHERS LOOKING AT TECHNOLOGY

To the influence of modern technology on our life, philosophers and thinkers reacted differently. For the sake of clarification I will simply divide them into four groups:

1- A. The pessimist who wants to go back to nature and at the same time attach the progress of technology to stop it as a harmful progress to nature and man, an example here is the naturalists and the nature based romantic people; a specific example could be Theodore Kaczynski.3 In regards to artificial intelligence, Kaczynski postulated that if computer scientists succeeded in developing intelligent machines that do all things better than human beings, then, all work will be done by machines with the least of human effort. In this case either machine will make their own decisions without human oversight or human control over the machines might be retained.

If machines were effectively controlling people, then people would not be able to turn machines off because they would be so dependent on the machines; that turning machines off would amount to suicide. On the other hand, if humans control machines then the elite will have greater control over the masses and because human work will no longer be necessary then the masses will be superfluous; a useless burden on the system. If the elite is ruthless, they may simply decide to exterminate the mass of humanity. If they are humane, they may use propaganda, psychological or biological techniques to reduce the birth rate until the mass of humanity becomes extinct.

2- The optimists who believe that the progress of technology is a good thing that will improve the human condition and make society better, an example here are the majority of people who believe in the power of technology such as almost all politicians to improve the state by better technology, and Ray Kurzweil4 who replied to Kaczynski. Kurzweil thinks that Kaczynski advocates a simple return to nature by dropping technology and reverts to a simpler time, even though he made a compelling case for the dangers and damages that have accompanied industrialization, still Kaczynski’s vision is neither compelling nor feasible. Kurzweil thinks that after all there is too little nature left to return to.

3- The group that does not use technology but at the same time does not attack technology or its progress, this community lives according to the community standards and religious belief such as the Amish community. Their concept of “progress” is also good, but is not defined in terms of technological advancement.

4- The group of thinkers who are deeply and philosophically concerned about the human condition and the future of humanity; have no problem with the progress of technology as long as there is a parallel progress in the moral and social aspects of society so that technology will not affect the future of humanity. Those thinkers are neither pessimists nor optimists. You can find thosethinkers in monotheistic religions and other religions. In this group, we can distinguish two lines of reasoning that are closely connected:

1- The group that calls for renewing moral philosophy by emphasizing the role of “responsibility” such as Hans Jonas.

2- The group that commands the ethics of responsibility and goes further to call for “preventive ethics” by reviving that which has been neglected for many centuries.